The waste-to-energy project remains under discussion at Chatham-Kent council, after councillors raised concerns about information posted on the Environmental Registry of Ontario (ERO) compared to reports previously presented to council.
Councillor Rhonda Jubenville raised the issue during non-agenda business at Monday’s council meeting, pointing to an ERO posting related to Greenfield Global Inc. and the Chatham-Kent Public Utilities Commission.
The ERO is a provincial public consultation platform that allows residents and stakeholders to provide feedback on proposed environmental approvals.
“I went through all the reports and I did not see anything about this ERO in any of the reports, unless I missed it and council was never apprised of this ERO, and for me I compare it to what we’ve been dealing with in Dresden with York 1,” said Jubenville.
“When there was an ERO, actually there were a few EROs posted on the website, and we were very diligent on pushing the public to comment and give feedback and for this one council hasn’t been apprised of it.”
Jubenville asked whether council would be directing residents to the posting so they could provide comments.
Chief Financial Officer Gord Quinton said multiple regulatory processes have been underway in the background as the project advanced.
“There is a change in the environmental footprint at the PUC, that’s one application, there is a change in the waste approval process at the ethanol plant and then there’s the new site of the anaerobic digester,” said Quinton.
“These have been ongoing for the last six months, particularly as we got to a financially viable project. All these regulatory approvals have been going on in the background.”
Deputy CAO Dave Taylor said there are no legal concerns with the ERO process, noting that environmental approvals for such facilities are routine and technical in nature.
“Getting an Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) for a waste management system of this type is not an unusual thing to have to do… That’s very much a technical matter that gets addressed and proceeds forward very regularly,” said Taylor.
Councillor Alysson Storey, however, raised concerns about discrepancies between the ERO posting and information previously provided to council.
“The difference in information is quite substantial,” said Storey.
“Our report to council said we would be taking 347,000 tonnes at the Greenfield site and on the ERO it says 900,000. And that is actually almost the same as what we take at the Ridge landfill, which is the largest landfill in Ontario.”
According to a Deloitte report presented to council in April, the project was expected to process approximately 370,000 wet tonnes of organic waste annually, primarily from ethanol stillage and municipal sewage sludge.
However, the ERO posting states the facility is designed to process up to 900,000 tonnes of non-hazardous waste per year.
Deputy CAO Dave Taylor said staff would return with clarification. The discrepancy may relate to how the ERO is worded and how capacity figures are defined.
Taylor also noted the ERO related to the waste-to-energy project differs from other ERO postings in Dresden referenced by councillors.
Storey encouraged residents to review the ERO posting and submit comments before the consultation period closes on June 4.
